欢迎访问作物学报，今天是
作物学报

作物学报 ›› 2011, Vol. 37 ›› Issue (07): 1308-1312.doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2011.01308

• 研究简报 • 上一篇    

高粱bmr-6和bmr-12基因对产量和品质性状的效应比较

王丽华,李杰勤,林平,王培,由振文,詹秋文*   

  1. 安徽科技学院植物科学学院，安徽凤阳 233100
  • 收稿日期:2010-12-23 修回日期:2011-03-26 出版日期:2011-07-12 网络出版日期:2011-05-11
  • 通讯作者: 詹秋文, E-mail: qwzhan@163.com, Tel: 0550-6719202
  • 基金资助:

    本研究由安徽科技学院青年基金(ZRC2011280)，安徽高等学校省级自然科学研究项目(KJ2011Z075)，国家自然科学基金项目(31071470)，安徽省“115”产业创新团队(皖人才办[2009]2号)和安徽科技学院稳定人才专项(ZRC2009236)资助。

Comparison of Effects of Sorghum bmr-6 and bmr-12 Genes on Yield and Quality Traits

WANG Li-Hua,LI Jie-Qin,LIN Ping,WANG Pei,YOU Zhen-Wen,ZHAN Qiu-Wen*   

  1. College of Plant Science and Technology, Anhui Science and Technology University, Fengyang 233100, China
  • Received:2010-12-23 Revised:2011-03-26 Published:2011-07-12 Published online:2011-05-11
  • Contact: 詹秋文, E-mail: qwzhan@163.com, Tel: 0550-6719202

PDF

1290

被引次数

4

摘要： 比较了在Atlas、Early Hegari-Sart、Kansas Collier、Rox Orange和Wheatland 5种高粱遗传背景下，bmr-6和bmr-12基因对产量性状及品质性状的影响。结果表明，bmr-6和bmr-12基因使株高显著降低，同时增加了植株的茎粗；而对分蘖数和叶片数的影响较小。bmr-6和bmr-12对产量性状是负面影响，但在不同的遗传背景下不一致。对于品质性状，bmr-6一般是使中性洗涤纤维和酸性洗涤纤维降低，而bmr-12则对这两者影响不大。bmr-6和bmr-12都使酸性洗涤木质素和酸不溶灰分降低。综合考虑，bmr-12的育种利用价值比bmr-6大。

关键词: 高粱, bmr-6, bmr-12, 产量性状, 品质性状

Abstract: This research aimed to compare the impact of bmr-6 and bmr-12 on yield and quality traits in five sorghum genetic backgrounds: Atlas, Early Hegari-Sart, Kansas Collier, Rox Orange and Wheatland. The results showed that bmr-6 and bmr-12 generally made a shorter plant height and bigger stem diameter. However, bmr-6 and bmr-12 had little effects on tiller number and leaf number.Bmr-6 and bmr-12 had negative effects on yield traits, but the effects were different in different genetic backgrounds. As for the quality traits, bmr-6 generally decreased the contents of NDF (Neutral Detergent Fiber) and ADF (Acid Detergent Fiber) and bmr-12 had no impact on the two traits. Both bmr-6 and bmr-12 decreased the contents of ADL (Acid Detergent Lignin) and ADF (Acid Detergent Lignin) in the five genetic backgrounds. Considering all factors, bmr-12 is more useful in breeding than bmr-6.

Key words: Sorghum, bmr-6, bmr-12, Yield traits, Quality traits

[1]Lu Q-S(卢庆善). Sorghum (高粱学). Beijing: China Agriculture Press, 1999, pp 1–24
[2]Cherney J H, Cherney D J R, Akin D E, Axtell J D. Potential of brown-midrib, low-lignin mutants for improving forage quality. Adv Agron, 1991, 46: 157–198
[3]Barriere Y, Ralph J, Mechin V, Guillaumie S, Grabber J H, Argillier O, Chabbert B, Lapierre C. Genetic and molecular basis of grass cell wall biosynthesis and degradability: II. Lessons from brown-midrib mutants. Comptes Rendus Biologies, 2004, 327: 847–860
[4]Porter K S, Axtell J D, Lechtenberg V L, Colenbrander V F. Phenotype, fiber composition, and in vitro dry matter disappearance of chemically induced brown midrib (bmr) mutants of sorghum. Crop Sci, 1978, 18: 205–209
[5]Bittinger T S, Cantrell R P, Axtell J D. Allelism tests of the brown-midrib mutants of sorghum. J Hered, 1981, 72: 147–148
[6]Casler M D, Pedersen J F, Undersander D J. Forage yield and economic losses associated with the brown-midrib trait in Sudangrass. Crop Sci, 2003, 43: 782–789
[7]Zhang L-Y(张丽英). Analysis and Quality Detection Technology of Feed (饲料分析及饲料质量检测技术), 3rd edn. Beijing: China Agricultural University Press, 2007
[8]Neuffer M G, Jones L, Zuber M S. The Mutants of Maize. Matthias S, Hamilton H, eds. Madison, WI: Crop Science Society of America, 1968
[9]Lee M H, Brewbaker L L. Effects of brown midrib on yields and yield components of maize. Crop Sci, 1984, 24: 105–108
[10]Oliver A L, Pedersen J F, Grant R J, Klopfenstein T J. Comparative effects of the Sorghum bmr-6 and bmr-12 genes: I. Forage sorghum yield and quality. Crop Sci, 2005, 45: 2234–2239
[11]Pedersen J F, Vogel K P, Funnell D L. Impact of reduced lignin on plant fitness. Crop Sci, 45: 812–819
[12]Casler M D, Pedersen J F, Undersander D J. Forage yield and economic losses associated with the brown-midrib trait in Sudangrass. Crop Sci, 2003, 43: 782–789
[13]Khurana A D, Verma A N. Some biochemical plant characters in relation to susceptibility of sorghum to stemborer and shootfly. Indian J Entomol, 1983, 45: 29–37
[14]Moussa M D, Hill N S, Wiseman B R, Isenhour D J. Panicle-stage resistance to Spodoptera frugiperda (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) in converted sorghum accessions. J Econ Entomol, 1991, 84: 337–344
[1] 徐建霞, 丁延庆, 曹宁, 程斌, 高旭, 李文贞, 王若若, 王磊, 张立异. 397份高粱种质资源在贵州表型多样性分析及综合评价[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(4): 1073-1087.
[2] 蒋嘉卉, 江炳志, 刘冠明, 王章英, 唐朝臣. 紫肉甘薯品质性状的近红外光谱预测模型构建与优化[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(4): 1088-1102.
[3] 赵翔, 李佳宜, 李爽, 韩文辉, 黄俊霞, 姚兴东, 张惠君, 王海英, 谢甫绨. 高温对不同大豆品种干物质积累和糖代谢的影响[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(3): 857-865.
[4] 付江鹏, 柳发财, 闫宝琴, 王永栋, 李利利, 魏玮, 周英霞. 控释肥替代普通尿素对旱作高粱干物质积累分配、产量和品质的影响[J]. 作物学报, 2025, 51(9): 2501-2513.
[5] 王天译, 杨绣娟, 赵佳佳, 郝宇琼, 郑兴卫, 武棒棒, 李晓华, 郝水源, 郑军. 山西小麦醇溶蛋白多样性及其对面粉品质效应研究[J]. 作物学报, 2025, 51(7): 1784-1800.
[6] 徐建霞, 丁延庆, 曹宁, 程斌, 高旭, 李文贞, 张立异. 中国高粱株高和节间数全基因组关联分析及候选基因预测[J]. 作物学报, 2025, 51(3): 568-585.
[7] 张瀚, 余金琎, 谭林璐, 张婧泉, 王小董, 谢庄, 谢可盈, 凌英华, 赵芳明. 基于CSSL-Z267的单/双片段代换系的水稻产量性状QTL遗传效应解析与设计育种应用[J]. 作物学报, 2025, 51(12): 3157-3170.
[8] 姜骁, 赵健鑫, 毕竞男, 许静, 殷祥贞, 赵旭红, 潘丽娟, 陈娜, 马俊卿, 韩鹏, 杨珍, 迟晓元. 中国北方主产区主要地理和气候因子对花生农艺性状和品质的影响[J]. 作物学报, 2025, 51(10): 2805-2820.
[9] 陈昊翔, 万鑫杰, 陈青, 王劲松, 董二伟, 王媛, 黄晓磊, 刘秋霞, 焦晓燕. 石灰性褐土条件下高粱与玉米耐瘠薄特性及对土壤肥力响应的比较[J]. 作物学报, 2025, 51(10): 2775-2787.
[10] 聂波涛, 刘德泉, 陈健, 崔正果, 侯云龙, 陈亮, 邱红梅, 王跃强. 北方春大豆品种农艺和品质性状分析与综合评价[J]. 作物学报, 2024, 50(9): 2248-2266.
[11] 彭小爱, 卢茂昂, 张玲, 刘童, 曹磊, 宋有洪, 郑文寅, 何贤芳, 朱玉磊. 基于55K SNP芯片的小麦籽粒主要品质性状的全基因组关联分析[J]. 作物学报, 2024, 50(8): 1948-1960.
[12] 李长喜, 董占鹏, 关永虎, 刘金伟, 李航, 梅拥军. 南疆陆地棉农艺性状与皮棉产量性状的遗传贡献及决策系数分析[J]. 作物学报, 2024, 50(6): 1486-1502.
[13] 孙美红, 王彩琴, 王蓉, 白文斌, 高振峰. Bacillus velezensis G-1·脂肽悬浮种衣剂的制备及其对高粱丝黑穗病菌的防侵染效果[J]. 作物学报, 2024, 50(6): 1467-1485.
[14] 陈玉章, 吴松果, 卢成霖, 李瑞, 龚利娟, 文悦, 宁佳欣, 吴宇涵. 条带垄覆对西南黄壤坡耕地径流和高粱水分利用的影响[J]. 作物学报, 2024, 50(5): 1325-1340.
[15] 王瑞, 张福耀, 詹鹏杰, 楚建强, 晋敏姗, 赵威军, 程庆军. 基于RNA-Seq筛选高粱低氮胁迫相关候选基因[J]. 作物学报, 2024, 50(3): 669-685.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited
  Shared   
  Discussed   
No Suggested Reading articles found!
京ICP备15008789号-2